Yashica duel - Electro 35 vs Yashica Lynx

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

Even feeling more comfortable with the Lynx, I suspect the better lens of the Electro 35 should be a matter of consideration.
Here you have a 100% crop of two shots, one with the Electro 35 and the other with the Lynx, both of the same subject but with slightly different view angle.

To be fair, the first was shot with an unbranded cheap film and the second one with Fuji Superia 200. Both processed by different labs, so the scans may be quite different as well.

First one is the Lynx.
It seems to me that the Electro wins, although I should do some further testing with the Lynx in better conditions.

Jes.

Orio · Expire: 2012-12-04

if you compare two lenses based on different films, you risk to evaluate the films and not the lenses.
I suggest retesting with the same film and conditions (although of course I know it's expensive to do this with film and different cameras).

F16SUNSHINE · Expire: 2011-11-18

Hi Jes
Orio is probably correct about film. That being said. You will in fact find better results in regard to contrast and color with the Electro. Yashica made improvements to the coatings over the years(as all companies did especially in that time). I like to use the lynx with B+W film. Especially pushing it 2 or three stops for that gritty grainy look. Only one of my Lynx RF's has a working meter. So sunny f16 is the norm when I shoot it. When estimating by eye pushing film a few stops gets You some more latitude. It also allows freedom to create and shoot in really low light. Not great for landscapes and architecture but, great for street shooting and candid portraits. I know you have only a small flat. But I would strongly suggest you develelop your own B+W film. The number of items needed for negative development fits in a rubbermaid the size of a small picnick cooler. It really is more fun than going to the lab. Also the feeling of bringing those negs to life is really great. Printing of course takes more space and commitment of cash. If you have access to a nice scanner you are good to go. The scanner is my next purchase. I am waiting for Larry's report on the Epson V700. It is maybe more than I need but. If it lasts me more years It is of course worth it. I developed (B+W) two from last weekend last night. The negs look promising. Michelle and I might set up the enlargers and make contact proofs tonight. Keep them coming. Best wishes Andy

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

Jesito · Expire: 2015-01-07

montecarlo · Joined: 04 Apr 2007 Posts: 1865 Location: Romania

Hello,

As Orio and Andy said the film should be the same to compare the lens. The better quality the film is the better you'll see the difference if it is one.
http://web.archive.org/web/20041204042246/creekin.net/films.htm
Here I found this:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041210091955/medfmt.8k.com/mf/lenslpm.html
where it says:
" lens film system film system film system
lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm lpmm
100 : 100 50 80 44 50 33
200 : 100 67 80 57 50 40
300 : 100 75 80 63 50 43
400 : 100 80 80 67 50 44
500 : 100 83 80 69 50 45
600 : 100 86 80 71 50 46
Let us say you buy a pricey superior lens that delivers 600 lpmm aerial resolution (vs. 300 lpmm cheapie). With film resolution of 100 lpmm, the resulting system resolution should be 86 lpmm. This resolution modestly beats the cheapy lens, whose system resolution will be circa 75 lpmm.

What if you switch to typical color print film providing only 50 lpmm film resolution (third section of table above)? Now your pricey lens is only able to deliver 46 lpmm on the film, while the cheapy lens is uncomfortably close at 43 lpmm! A 3 lpmm resolution improvement is going to be awfully hard to see on most minilab prints, even at 8x10". That is why it doesn't matter much which lenses you use with low resolution limit color print films.

The big surprise on the above chart is how major improvements in lens quality and performance does NOT result in equally major improvements in the on-film overall system results. The film is the limiting factor here, not the lenses. Doubling the lens performance with 100 lpmm film resolution limits only resulted in a 15% overall system improvement. Using 50 lpmm film limits, the corresponding system improvement is only about 6%."